<p>Hello everyone,</p>
<p>If you wouldn't mind, I'd really appreciate if a few of you could read my essay and give me some feedback. Normally, I do a more standard essay (Intro, 3 Examples, Conclusion), but I've noticed that a lot of the 12 essays veer off this path into more critical analysis instead of example use, so I thought I'd try that instead (although I do use an example too). That being said, this is certainly an unorthodox style of essay writing for me and I'd appreciate it if any of you could let me know your thoughts.</p>
<p>The prompt is: Are children's political opinions an echo of those espoused by their parents?</p>
<pre><code> Children are intrinsically and heavily shaped by their parents, due in large part to the high level of contact they share with one another. As such, since a child's capacity to hold opinions develops at an earlier age than his capacity to formulate opinions devoid of external influence, it logically follows that the opinions of a child regarding key political issues generally mirror those of his parents. Such a fact is not so much a result of parents' desire to espouse their children with certain beliefs as it is the byproduct of other, evolutionarily beneficial, processes.
Over time, due to natural selection, children have been instilled with the notion to follow their parents' instructions; in essence, since the child that heeds his parents' warning not to play with fire stands a far greater chance of survival, it stands to reason that children, over many generations, will grow to be more obedient of their parents and avoid fire. Since children are not developed enough to be completely safe on their own, this is largely beneficial, and in some instances, crucial, to their survival. Yet this same process by which a child learns not to play with fire, in the modern world, can cause a child to absorb a parent's opinions as well. As such, it is only logical that children will, until they are old enough to think independently on key issues, echo the political views of their parents.
This trend is evident in literature as well, particularly in Ray Bradbury's dystopian novel Fahrenheit 451 (don't know how to italicize on this site, but obviously it should be). In this novel, Bradbury depicts a futuristic society wherein all literature is proscribed. As such, many members of this society have grown irrationally fearful of books. One major character in the novel, Mildred Montag, is particularly averse to literature, and as result, her children are as well. Meanwhile, the McClellan family is a rarity in this society in that they fully support the publication of books. Logically, due to the influence of her parents, Clarisse, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. McClellan, is herself a strong advocate of literature as well. Thus, Bradbury presents the alternate viewpoints of the Montag children and Clarisse McClellan to demonstrate that the children's opinions are a result of the environment in which they are raised and, particularly, the attitudes of their parents towards books.
In conclusion, the political views of a child largely echo those of his parents. Since a child is raised to follow his parents obediently for his own safety, the child garners not only lessons from his parents, but opinions as well, a fact further demonstrated in Ray Bradbury's novel Fahrenheit 451. As Harvard psychology professor Dr. John Goldstein opined, "The environment of a child is one in which the parent is always right, and rightfully so." Indeed, this is certainly true, but it does raise additional consequences in regards to the child's formulation of his opinions.
</code></pre>
Bonne chance!